Re: [Know_Nukes] Risk assessment and value of human life.

["Jim Hoerner" <jim_hoerner@HOTMAIL.COM>]

>From: John Jacobus <crispy_bird@y...>

>To: radsafe <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>,  know_nukes 

><know_nukes@yahoogroups.com>

>Subject: [Know_Nukes] Risk assessment and value of human life.

>Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 07:00:39 -0800 (PST)



>One of the questions that comes up periodically is "how much should be sent 

>to save a life?"  The article at 

>http://slate.msn.com/default.aspx?id=2079475 suggests that it may depend on 

>whether you consider future generations.

>

>

>-- John

>John Jacobus, MS

>Certified Health Physicist



Thanks for this post and the one on CSI, John.



I've seen the $10M/life saved figure elsewhere recently.



It's my understanding that another figure used in the nuclear industry is 

$10k per REM avoided.  Is that number up-to-date?



My understanding is also that an estimate of latent cancer fatalities from 

large doses of radiation is 0.0005 LCF/person-REM - 

http://twilight.saic.com/newtec/comm/EIS_Sample.pdf .



It's complicated, since latency is not as bad as immediate death, but if you 

do the math, you come up with $20M dollars spent per LCF avoided.



I know, some people will be offended about placing _any_ value on human 

life, but I encourage them to read what John posted (included below).  Also 

consider that if you were on your death bed, how much would you expect 

society to pay to keep you alive.  I must have low self-esteem, because I 

wouldn't want them to waste $10M perpetuating my lame humor.  That money 

would be better spent elsewhere, like by sending my kids to Nuke College - 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Know_Nukes/message/126 .



No offense intended to anyone, particularly those at downwinders who I have 

cc'd - many of whom who have been injured by atmospheric weapons tests or 

occupational exposures to various things.



Regards,

Jim



--

Hold the door for the stranger behind you.  When the driver a 

half-car-length in front of you signals to get over, slow down.  Smile and 

say "hi" to the folks you pass on the sidewalk.  Give blood.  Volunteer.







http://slate.msn.com/default.aspx?id=2079475



Is Your Life Worth $10 Million?

Nope. But your grandson's will be.

By Steven E. Landsburg

Posted Monday, March 3, 2003, at 6:22 AM PT



While touring the magnificent old Dupont estate, I overheard an awestruck 

gardener mutter, "You can see why these people would have hated to die worse 

than anybody." I know what he meant. Life is dear, but life is dearer when 

you're rich.



You're richer than your grandparents, so your life is worth more than 

theirs. That's why you live in a safer world than they did: As life gets 

more valuable, we strive harder to protect it.



What does it mean to say that one life is "worth more" than another? Aren't 

all lives infinitely precious? Well, no, at least not in any sense that's at 

all useful for making hard policy decisions about things like job safety and 

access to medical care.



Economists measure the value of a life by people's willingness to pay for 

safety. Suppose you'd willingly cough up $50,000—but no more—to shave one 

percentage point off your chance of being killed in an accident. Then 

(except for some technical adjustments I won't go into) we infer that the 

value of your life is 100 times $50,000, or $5 million.



That's a useful measure because it bears directly on policy decisions. Take 

the decision of how much to spend on fire safety. Should a town of 100 

people spend $6 million on a piece of equipment that is likely, over the 

long run, to save one life? Not if a life is worth only $5 million. Buying 

the equipment means forcing the average taxpayer to spend $60,000 for a 

level of safety that's worth only $50,000 to her.



Economists summarize that reasoning by saying, "It makes no sense to spend 

$6 million to save a life that's worth only $5 million." What we really mean 

by that is: "Let's not force people to buy more safety than they want to."



So, how do we find out how much a life is really worth? One of the best ways 

is to measure how much extra you have to pay someone to take a dangerous 

job. If lion tamers and elephant tamers have comparable skills and 

comparable working conditions, but lion tamers earn $20,000 a year more than 

elephant tamers, it's probably because that's what it takes to compensate 

someone for the risk of being eaten by a lion. And if that risk amounts to, 

say, an extra half-percent probability of dying on the job, then you figure 

that the value of a life must be $20,000 per half-percent, or $40,000 per 

percentage point, or $4 million.



So, once you carry out that experiment, how much does a typical life turn 

out to be worth? Professors Dora Costa of MIT and Matthew Kahn of Tufts 

point out that it depends on exactly when you asked the question. As incomes 

have risen, so has the value of life. The increase is more than 

proportional: A 10 percent rise in income is generally associated with about 

a 15 percent rise in the value of a life. Between 1940 and 1980, according 

to Costa and Kahn, the value of a life increased from about $1 million 1990 

dollars to between $4 million and $5 million 1990 dollars.



(Other researchers, notably Harvard's Kip Viscusi, have found higher 

numbers. Viscusi estimates that the value of a life in 1970 might already 

have been as high as $8 million 1990 dollars.)



The upward trend is hardly surprising. For one thing, the mere fact that 

we're richer now means that we can afford to pay more for just about 

everything, including our own safety (and by implication our own lives). But 

beyond that, there are a lot of reasons to value life more now than in the 

past. There's a lot more to live for in a world with central 

air-conditioning, high-speed Internet access, and advanced medical care. 

Besides, life expectancies have increased by about 10 years since 1940. 

Today's 50-year-old, with perhaps 30 good years ahead of him, will value the 

remainder of his life more than yesterday's 50-year-old, who already heard 

time's winged chariot drawing near.



Here's what's most important about these observations: Just as your life is 

more valuable than your grandfather's, so your grandchildren's lives will 

probably be more valuable than your own. So, when we make decisions about, 

say, how much to spend on medical research, we should account for the fact 

that future lives will be worth more than present ones. Even if it's not 

worth spending $7 million to save your own paltry life, it might be worth 

spending it to save your grandson's.



_________________________________________________________________

MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*  

http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus



************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.

You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/